According to a report by Reuters Japanese electronics manufacturer Sony has lifted its operating income estimate for the financial year ended March 31. Sony says it now expects an income of around ¥285 billion ($2.6 billion), which is up from a 240 billion yen estimate in February.

The main reason for the adjustment of the estimate are lower amortization costs for Sony's financial services segment but the company also cites lower-than-anticipated costs for its image sensor business. The company doesn't provide any more detail than that, so we can only speculate what those anticipated costs were.

Sony's semiconductor business has been a market leader for years with a dominating market share of around 40 percent. Sony sensors have been deployed in the cameras and smartphones of a large number of vendors. The company will report its full-year results on April 28.

Comments

Sony expected to have to revamp the production facilities at a rate pretty much equal to innovation.....but they ended up being so far ahead technologically, that they can, essentially, "coast" for a year, without major changes to the systems they use to produce sensors for their vendors.

This is double trouble for everyone else in the industry, because it means Sony can deploy the latest and greatest just to THEMSELVES, while taking in higher profits from what they sell to everyone else.

Widening the gap.....and it should be pretty obvious after last week, the gap is VERY wide.

Unless theiy overestimate in their projection's one thing I'd be curious to know is are they cutting corners to cut costs and make op. income look better? Because sometimes things look really good on paper (like financials) but in practice, it can backfire. Reduce or cut the wrong cost, and product quality just went down the tubes because maybe you thought you'd inspect every 100th sensor, not every 10th sensor to save $1 an hour in labor for example. sometimes cutting costs can be too costly (sorry for the pun)... And given that (as mentioned in other comments) Sony has sold off some of its other brands and divisions to stay afloat, this "costs" part is of concern, because you can always cut costs to make op income look better, but sometimes it can come back and bite you in the ass if you cut (or reduce) the wrong cost (such as loosening up on QC or even R&D in some instances, things can slip through the cracks because you wanted to make the financials look better).

I'm aware that after a few years, and after a product or technology has become mature, you can find cheaper ways to make the product as efficiency in production increases, so it will be interesting to see if these lower costs are going to affect overall quality or availability of products. Is this increase in operating income going to come at a cost of quality or availability because it was really a cost-reduction scheme (meaning cutting corners versus efficiency)?

So who designed the stacked cmos sensor? Sony camera or Sony sensor? If it was Sony sensor, Nikon and Canon can buy it. After all, Sony sensor is an independent entity. Why should Sony camera have all the benefit? Seriously, who owns the technology?

In regards to sensor technology in general, I think it depends on who it's for. For example, I read somewhere (and I have to verify) that Sony makes Fuji's sensors for its cameras, but the sensor was designed by Fuji, so it's not really Sony's technology... unless they had a say in the design, but I don't see any evidence of that. So in this case Fuji own's the design, Sony just makes them to Fuji's spec and design plans. So I think the idea of who "owns" what technology depends. With Nikon, I think the same story is very close, where Nikon probably played a part in their sensor design with the help of Sony, but Sony manufacturers the sensor (otherwise Sony would be using the same sensors as Nikon, wouldn't they) and then we'd have a closer match between the two, but they don't). Sony might be forbid from using the Nikon sensor in any of its cameras in their agreements, which is a bit foolish on Sony's part because they are making a competitors sensor thus helping the competition.

I think the sensors are both designed and manufactured by the semiconductor division. But since they are part of the same corporation, the imaging division get first-hand knowledge about the latest developments and future research, which means that they can develop cameras that take advantage of new tech before it's offered to other companies.

The semiconductor division, being an independent entity, are of course free to also manufacture sensors designed by others, or co-develop sensors with other companies, and those sensors will not be available for use in Sony's cameras. This is not really "helping the competition", but rather "helping a customer". The competition is between the camera makers, and the semiconductor business is operating independently from Sony's camera business.

So If Chrysler no longer wanted to build its own engines, but rather by ones that's prebuilt, do you think they'd go to Chevy or Ford or Toyota, or someone else not in the auto industry that deesigns and builds engines? I would think the latter. Yes, Sony is helping out a customer, but that customer happens to be a competitor. If you read up on the history of Windows, you'll find that IBM asked MIcrosoft to write their GUI program which was like Windows, but called OS2. After a while, Microsoft told IBM that it was no longer going to assist in development because it was essentially developing both their own, and a product that was directly competing against them. That's kind of the way I see the Sony sensor & Nikon relationship. Yes, the sensor division is separate from the camera division, but it also limits Sony R&D in some ways.

Sony's semiconductor division is simply a provider of sensors and other components to many other companies, one of which happens to be another company within the Sony Corporation. The revenue that Sony Corporation as a whole would lose by only selling sensors to its own camera division, would have a larger impact on their financials than what little competitive edge they would gain against other camera makers by doing so. The sensor business is much more important to Sony than the relatively small camera business.

I guess all the more I wouldn't want to dump all my eggs into Sony just yet.... while it may appear that they are here to stay (for now), that may change in the (near) future (next 5-10 years). Despite the "lack of innovation" that some will claim with Nikon and Canon, they've been doing cameras a bit longer and have built up a reputation, despite still using technology that's now about 40-50 years old, but that doesn't matter much in some people's eyes. I mean, we still drive fuel-burning vehicles, of which, the technology dates back over 100 years, and yet the majority of vehicles on the road today still burn some sort of fossil fuels.

I would venture to guess Sony Sensor owns the sensor and sells to the Camera division. At least, that's how many companies do it. They run them as divisions or separate entities on paper, with a parent entity (Sony, Inc?) to act between the two, but being that the sensor is probably designed in the Sensor division's R&D dept, I would guess that if one of the entities had to own it, it would be the Sensor division.

I had a thought today (happens sometimes) and that is that the more diversified a company is, the more likely it is to abruptly drop its camera component if profits falter there. That makes Sony and Canon as likely candidates as any to say goodbye to cameras, and Nikon less likely to bail. Highly diversified Samsung was building great cameras, but wasn't making money off them - so bye-bye.

Canon are predicting 154 Billion Yen in profits from their camera division this year, I can't imagine it going anywhere. (Also 178 B from office, 21 B from Industry.) Nikon have cameras as an even bigger part of the business, but that's partly as they are spending a lot of money on their shiny new medical division (which is too young to make money) and the precision division had a lot of write-downs (a lot!).

Thom Hogan has this theory on a "hobby" business, for example Ricoh's camera business is so small in comparison to Ricoh it usually doesn't even get a mention in the accounts other than in "Misc". I'm not so sure as they did say they were working on its profitability.

The obvious ones to go away would be Olympus who have apparently never made an annual profit from m43 cameras and Panasonic. However I think the Oly board see cameras as an "Olympus" thing so it will be okay and Panasonic are still hoping video will save them (which it might).

If I would make that prediction I would say 'Sony' is much more likely to jump out of the camera market then Canon will.

I say 'camera' NOT 'sensor'.

Sony Digital Imaging business is part of their Consumer Product Division. It is this business division that Sony is currently wanting to get rid off and is restructuring for a long time already.

Slowly they are selling off their TV business, and Audio business. It is more then likely that Sony may well sell their digital imaging business to TP Vision or whatever other Chinese company that is willing to make labeled products for Sony.

The only reason for Sony to hold on to their camera business is to showcase its possibilities. Therewith its more an outlet so to sell more sensors as well.

Sony Digital Imaging includes all the pro gear they make for Holywood and broadcast industry. It's a core part of their business. Plus it's been profitable for last 5 years. It's not going anywhere in your lifetime.

Devices division (sensors were part of that division) did lose money a few times last 5 years, but Imaging division did not.

Still cameras are an integral part of pro imaging division as video and stills are integrating, all the way down to sensors and imaging processors, both use same parts. There is no separation. That's one of the reasons these cameras aren't disappearing in your lifetime. The whole division has been profitable (unlike sensor where they have lost money several times).

Fujica, it's not a separate division. All of them (pro video, stills) merged as one called Imaging division a few years ago, and no Sony has not lost money in Imaging division for several years. Look it up. They did lose money on sensors, even last year or a year before they lost money in Devices division, and sensors were part of that division.

Fujica, you are a liar. If you had been working for them, you would not have been posting nonense. Sensors were under devices division which has lost money. The pro video division (which makes broadcast cameras and other broadcast equipment) merged with still cameras division and were renamed Imaging division a few years ago. Stop being a moron, dude. Don't post about topics you know nothing about. I never said sensors were under Imaging division. Sensors lost money and were a different division.

The division that made broadcast equipment (CineAlta, FS7, all another kind of broadcast gear) and still camera division like that which makes Alpha and cybershot merged as one "Imaging division" in 2012

ET2 - I am not a liar - you can search for me on LinkedIn and see for yourself.

Before you call somebody a liar its better to make sure to check your sources. Its rather rude to make somebody out for a liar whom you don't know and whom you have no background info over.

A 'business unit' is not a division you little boy.FYI a business unit is part of of a division, but is a sole entity within the division. They have their own forecast, they have their own sales targets. They have their own marketing, and their own objectives. A BU is nothing more then a business within a business.

I don't think Sony would necessarily drop the camera division, but they could discontinue certain lines if they weren't profitable. I agree that diversified companies sort of scare me a bit. Nikon is diversified, but not like Sony or Canon. (Canon I have no problem with because they are almost in the top 3 in most of their markets they compete in probably--I haven't looked lately but they are among the top). But diversified companies are more likely to sell off divisions if they aren't profitable with (in some cases) little or not effect on the other divisions, other than it would probably free up cash and resources. But the same concern can be true of a company that only makes one type of product--what happens if that product fades out (like Kodak film, although it's coming back). but for a while, their core market died off and they struggled probably... But this could happen to anyone as the market changes rapidly.

This is probably just a polite way of saying that they padded the earthquake rebuild estimate. Interesting to note that the Bank of Sony (i.e. financial services) is responsible for about half their profit.

Unfortunately sensors for traditional cameras vs smartphones, cars and IOT are both a trivial percentage of their business and unprofitable. Less than 1/10th of 1%. The sensor division has hinted that they plan to discontinue the camera segment of their product line unless it becomes profitable. As cameras are part of that division and also unprofitable... The A9 is a desperate attempt to increase margins and introduce profits, unfortunately there is too much wrong with that camera for it to be worth the asking price; just a modest improvement over the A7.

Cameras will probably remain a loser but sensors by definition cannot lose money because other manufacturers are captive and have to pay whatever Sony charges. No doubt one reason Canon chooses not to have this vulnerability.

Hahaha. TwoMetreBill, is he that German guy The Fatty Caruso?Who published this: https://youtu.be/jjZYHLHjfrYOr is he a dslr owner who is furiously frustrated because of the sony's success. Why not let people celebrate this achievement in the camera market. It's not about sony or canikon. It's just another good camera that is better than others *at the moment.

Cameras are not a part of the same division as the sensors. The semiconductor business is a separate subsidiary company; they don't make cameras or other consumer electronics products, they make components used in such products.This factual error throws doubt over the rest of the claims made by the OP.

Sony's camera division is one of their most profitable businesses since the time of the NEX series. They were totally surprised by their success and have ever since continued to build on that success turning it into a significant market share.

Then the actual imaging sensor business was even more successful since it supplies components to other camera & phone makers and this type of business is virtually always profitable. All of the risk is taken by the camera & phone manufacturers and not the sensor supplier (Sony). It was so profitable in fact, that Sony recently separated the sensor business as a separate legal entity to protect from potential liabilities in other parts of Sony.

.....and samsung, and lg, and gopro, and nikon, and canon point and shoots, and dozens of phones released in China and India, drones, car back up cameras and sensors for self-driving cars etc etc......Sony is smart.

My point is they are talking about primarily phones, not cameras.....at least that is what CEO Kaz Hirai stated.

"According to Hirai, that leaves Sony with three main businesses at its core :

Sony Pictures Entertainment, the hit-or-miss Hollywood studio that just fired Amy Pascal after being hacked to bits at the end of last year.The PlayStation division, which has so far won the next-gen console race with the PS4 but yet to define a clear mobile strategy; PlayStation Mobile is all but ignored, and the Vita is a beautifully noble failure.Selling image sensors to Apple for the iPhone."

They are required per financial reporting requirements to notify when materials events occur, this being one where a prior forecast is being updated and the difference is material. It's not that they are simply trying to brag.

Because they aim at another price range. Cameras with similar capabilities, but less advanced, cost in the same price range or 10-25% more. Sports cameras... Very fast, very accurate... If i read correctly people didn't compared A9 with 5D-IV, isn't it?

Who cares? Samsung have proven themselves to be bad for photography, having irresponsibly abandoned their NX customers and left them with a system that can't be upgraded. Lenses and accessories for NX owners are almost unobtainable, and people who bought into the system are now stuck with it, unless they can sell it (difficult!) and switch to another brand. Samsung is a company that do not deserve to be in the photographic industry.

No, I was mildly tempted to buy the NX1 but luckily I came to my senses and remained with Canon.

I have a Samsung phone and I'd consider buying another one, because it is a standalone - not a system product.

Photographers have different requirements. We need to know that if we buy into a camera system, that it won't disappear from the face of the Earth a few months later.

For those who were unlucky enough to end up with a Samsung NX you have inadvertently made another point when you say "if it still works, enjoy it", because if it stops working, they'll have a lot of problems getting it repaired, and won't be able to buy another NX body to replace it.

@entoman, there are no issues with getting the NX cameras/lenses repaired. Samsung is continuing to honor the warranty. After warranty expires, I have a local camera shop that does repairs. They can repair 50 year old cameras and still get parts for almost anything. NX prices have also been going up since there is more demand and less of the product now. Check ebay.

I am happy with my NX gear that fulfills my need. I do not really fear a potential failure as I have bought a couple of second-hand bodies and lenses as back-up at a low price. My main concern are the batteries. These are proprietary models, as usual :-(, and when they are dead, will I still be able to find good, reliable ones at a decent price ? Throwing the gear I am happy with just because I cannot find batteries for it is something that will be hard to accept...

Karroly - I wish you (and all NX owners) the best of luck in maintaining your NX cameras. My comment was not intended in any way to criticise your choice of equipment, it was intended purely to highlight the unacceptable approach that Samsung has towards serving its existing customers, as compared with other manufacturers.

Generally, my findings are that independent batteries are very inferior to those provided by the camera manufacturers. You get what you pay for. My genuine Canon batteries last for at least 3-4 years before showing any sign of losing charge, and they'll last for between 500-1000 shots per charge. Independent batteries (3 different brands) that I've used start losing their charge after about 6 months, and only take about half as many shots per charge, even when new.

VisualFX - If the prices of secondhand NX cameras and lenses is going up, that doesn't surprise me. While it was in production it was an excellent camera. I'd be pretty damned sure that all of this demand for spare bodies and lenses is coming from the very people who Samsung abandoned, i.e. people such as yourself who have already bought into the Samsung system, and are snapping up the few remaining secondhand lenses and buying spare bodies in expectation that the original bodies will at some stage fail.

Many cameras today include built-in image stabilization systems, but when it comes to video that's still no substitute for a proper camera stabilization rig. The Ronin-S aims to solve that problem for DSLR and mirrorless camera users, and we think DJI has delivered on that promise.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Professional commercial photographer Moe Lauchert shares an incredible gallery of film photographs he captured on Ilford HP5 with a Nikonos 5 while serving as a diver at NASA's Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory in Houston, Texas.

We've been shooting with a beta version of the Sony a9's upcoming firmware 5.0. While there's much more analysis to come, we can say it makes for a dead simple AF tracking user experience. Take a look at some of our samples.

The Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4 is a compact and light-weight lens for full-frame Canon and Nikon DSLRs. We took it on grand tour of Seattle's top tourist spots and found it makes a pleasant, albeit wide, walking around lens.

Fujifilm has announced its new GF 100-200mm F5.6 R LM OIS WR tele-zoom lens. The lens, equivalent to 79-158mm when mounted on a GFX camera, has image stabilization (with a claimed 5 stops of shake reduction), a linear AF motor and weather-sealing.

Amongst all of the camera news yesterday, Sony also announced its new Imaging Edge mobile app, which replaces PlayMemories Mobile. Three desktop applications have also been updated, adding support for time-lapse movie creation.

Our intrepid team is in San Diego, for the launch of the new Sony a6400. In this short overview video, Carey, Chris and Jordan talk through the main specifications of the new camera, and what they might mean for photographers and videographers.

The Sony a6400 is the company's new midrange mirrorless camera, whose standout features include an advanced autofocus system, flip-up touchscreen LCD and oversampled 4K footage with Log support. Learn more as we go hands-on with the a6400.

Sony has announced major firmware updates for the a7R III, a7 III and a9. All three cameras gain improved Eye-AF, the ability to recognize and focus on animals' eyes, and timelapse capability. The a9 gets more sophisticated subject tracking.